News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I don't think anyone is saying that we can't get rid of it, but it's not realistic to think that industrialized societies are going to give it up without alternatives that have little/no drawback, and that's going to take a lot of time and effort to develop. I'm not sure I see that sort of thing being properly incentivized unless we have conclusive data on plastic toxicity.
It is killing us. The evidene is mounting. Keep advocating for the status quo if you like, but it is insane to me.
I did not at any point advocate for the status quo or claim that there isn't mounting evidence that microplastics are toxic. Please don't mischaracterize my statement.
You claimed that unless there are alternatives with no drawbacks that we are doomed to this in industrialized societies.
I disagree.
When the drawback of plastic is that it is toxic to our health, it seems like all sorts of things we used to use should be back on the table, just for starters, drawbacks and all.
My claim is that alternatives with minimal drawbacks are going to be required in industrialized societies, yes, because plastic is very deeply ingrained in our industry, and has been critical to many of the advances that we've had in the last few decades (especially medicine and healthcare).
If we're talking about just the food supply chains, that's a little bit different because people are more willing to suffer inconvenience if the perceived health risk is large enough (because health depends on our diets). The problem is that the perceived risk, for the vast majority of people, is fairly small. Plastic ingestion poses chronic issues, not acute ones (mostly). This means that we've already addressed most of the more acute toxicity concerns, and the chronic concerns are going to require more conclusive data to persuade people to care now and not dismiss it by saying "I'll worry about that later, we have more important problems now".
That said, I never said we were "doomed". In fact I think that we're going to develop better and safer technologies, and plastic and how it reacts with living organisms will be better understood. But, I think that's going to take some time. In the mean time, I think we're going to start to go back to older materials (particularly in the food supply chains) where the additional cost is manageable. Plastic isn't going to go away completely though. Not now, not ever. The best we can do is make it safer, and mandate other materials where it's most important.